[ANN][DASH] Dash (dash.org) | First Self-Funding Self-Governing Crypto Currency

[coins101]

Haven't been able to keep up recently.

Sporks: are they a permanent feature of alt-coins? Hard forks can now be replaced by 2-step implementations, including checkpoints?

If so, no more ASICs unless it is voted upon by choice?

Part of LTC price pressure has been said to be down to ASIC miners dumping

https://litecointalk.org/index.php?topic=2327.msg190260#msg190260

BUMP

Can I ask, are Sporks the end of ASICs?

BUMP

Have we Has Evan just saved Bitcoin and Litecoin?

OK, now this is silly. I'm having a bump conversation with myself.

Someone save me.

Did Evan just save Bitcoin and Litecoin from ASICs?

The reality is that any coin, using any algo, can change anyway if the will is there to avoid ASICs. LTC had the chance and made the wrong choice, BTC still could but never will for a whole host of reasons.

DRK, with Evan + team, *is* willing and able to adapt as neccessary.

Sporking might make it easier for other coins, but it's nothing they couldn't have done anyway.

After the wheel was invented, I bet everyone just said - a wheel needs to be round, ofcourse it has to be so, everyone knows that. How else would something go round and round?

Litecoin won't avoid ASICS because of the risks of a hard fork, so they've decided to do nothing about it.

[hartvercoint]

{SNIP}

Multipools support so many coins, and every coin has their way of doing things, and we already have such a huge headache from avoiding forks, mandatory updates (across 40 wallets!!) that when a coin comes along and is like "Hey now you also need custom code, or a stratum update" it throws quiet the fork in to our operations. We don't follow your coins directly (at least I don't) but we are more than happy to comply and make sure your eco system is working-- just make it easy and clear for us to do so, because we have to do it across MANY MANY coins every day.

That's like complaining that you run a travel agency and each airline has different policies and keeping up with them is SUCH a burden. I mean, isn't it kind of obvious that dealing with dozens of coins is going to be challenging?

+1

Have you guys thought about that hostility isn't helping your/our case right now? Seriously!

Not a single posting of you guys has helped them with what to actually do. So cut them some slack and help them with complying or stfu.

What hostility ? Check again Oo Moreover the "lazy coding" part (by flound1129) was hostile so you stfu thx.

Right now it's us wanting something from them. Not the other way around.

Everyone chill a little.

[camosoul]

damn this is gonna be a soap opera this month

I'm the first one to use hostility, but I do know when it is absolutely the wrong tool for the job... Pain is not the teacher we need for this one.

[thelonecrouton]

Litecoin won't avoid ASICS because of the risks of a hard fork, so they've decided to do nothing about it.

LTC chose not to fork because their 'devs' haven't actually ever actually dev'd much, certainly not recently, and a lot of them had already sunk very large sums into scrypt ASIC preorders.

[coins101]

Litecoin won't avoid ASICS because of the risks of a hard fork, so they've decided to do nothing about it.

LTC chose not to fork because their 'devs' haven't actually ever actually dev'd much, certainly not recently, and a lot of them had already sunk very large sums into scrypt ASIC preorders.

Coblee went out of his way to say it was the hard fork risk, so everyone needed to just agree with him on that or leave. Which many did. I sold my stash of LTC on that day.

So basically, a spork is a lifeline for Litecoin and to a lesser extent to Bitcoin?

I'm not making this stuff up. Thats good to know. Watch the crypto world adopt it.

[coins101]

Privacy is extremely hard to come by on the Internet. Bitcoin itself is not very private right now.

Publication of the owner of a single Bitcoin address can yield an incredible amount of personal financial information, information that cannot be put ‘back in the box’ – it will be available forever, encoded into the blockchain. This is the sort of information that law enforcement agencies would typically need to subpoena a bank for; instead right now we offer it to the entire Internet.

We haven’t yet seen significant involvement from consumer privacy agencies at the Foundation, but I believe they will be horrified when they understand just how much private financial data is being broadcast and permanently recorded.

This information directly impacts citizens living under repressive governments. It could cause physical harm to a woman whose finances are controlled by her pimp or her kidnapper. The knowledge of transactions can be combined with violence to limit any human’s fundamental right to transact economically.

It seems therefore critical that we do everything we can to support efforts that enhance this privacy from global inspection. Technological efforts like trustless sharing and ZeroCoin/ZeroCash have potential to improve the privacy guarantees available to those using Bitcoin.

Not everyone will want this kind of privacy to be available.  In some jurisdictions, concerns over money laundering are brought up as the reason why such privacy should not be available.

I believe that these concerns are real and valid, and pragmatically, that a balance needs to be struck. We don’t yet know exactly how to balance the risks to different parties; on the one hand direct violence, control of individuals and financial risks borne by citizens with hyper-inflationary money supply are real harms being borne by human beings around the world right now. On the other hand there are real and more generalized harms to society that money laundering enables.

Right now, I believe the most reasonable regulatory approach is to encourage anti-money-laundering and know-your-customer rules that can be implemented at the ‘endpoints’, Bitcoin exchanges or money transmittal businesses. These businesses already have clear regulation and operations rules and understand how to identify money laundering, and what to do about it when they see it.

At the same time, we need to do better protecting those who have no other safe way to transact economically, and the Foundation will be providing support for a variety of proposals as a way to let the broader community engage with them and assess what would be useful.

Peter Vessenes, Chairman of the Board    Apr 05 2014, https://bitcoinfoundation.org/blog/?p=679


What Darkcoin is doing to create privacy in crypto transactions and in so doing creating eCash:

* Master Nodes These nodes handle the mixing through random selection -

They are responsible for being the authority of what goes into the joined transaction each session.

eduffield, 21 February 2014 https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg5282966#msg5282966

* I2P:

I'm implementing I2P into the masternodes. We're going to have our own private network just for DarkSend.

eduffield, 10 May 2014. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg6643662#msg6643662

* Ring signatures are going to be implemented in V2.

I will begin development immediately after I opensource V1.

eduffield, 12 May 2014. https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg6686819#msg6686819

While ring signatures present their own compatibility problems with the core DarkSend and Master Node network, the lead developer has consider the issues and is seeking to implement adaptations:

Ring Signatures, RC3 Progress Report 22 May 2014

I've had some substantial progress on DarkSend and have figured out how to make our existing system as secure as ring signatures. Vastly improved security, no bloat (from the ring signatures) and without actually having to trust new cryptography (it hasn't been extensively tested like what DarkSend uses) . So I think it'll give us a HUGE advantage in the coming months. More to come soon, I'm going to start implementing this tomorrow.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg6864666#msg6864666

*IP obfuscation 12 May 2014
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=421615.msg6694377#msg6694377


New Features:

*Checkpoints and Spork 26 June

With this launch, we introduced a new soft-fork method, which some users have affectionately dubbed the “spork”. As clients update, new features - Masternode payments, in this case - are implemented and available, though not strictly enforced by the network. After almost all users are updated, the fork can be remotely activated, which would enforce the new feature rules. If successful, the new feature(s) would be permanently activated and enforced. If unsuccessful, enforcement can be deactivated remotely for the whole network without the need for users to update their clients. In the latter case, a checkpoint would be added to put the whole network back on the same chain.

This allows us to test higher risk, innovative features in mainnet without having to hard fork the network and without the risk of a live rollback where all users must update.

https://darkcointalk.org/threads/rc4-development-and-path-going-forward.1604/


Is this all legal?

Hell, yes.

Jennifer Shasky Calvery, Director, Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, United States Department of the Treasury, confirms that financial privacy is a real and important aspect of all financial transactions.

The view on regulation is currently being considered in a similar light to Bitcoin. The Bank Secrecy Act and existing AML policies towards digital currency will still apply. In general, moving in and out of fiat requires the use of regulated entities.

Non disclosure of financial transactions on a blockchain ledger is not a reason to stop anonymity tools such as Darkcoin.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7bbDpwlTws&feature=youtu.be&t=11m48s

~12mins


So, next on my list of notes on what Darkcoin innovations have done for Crypto.

Is the above list still upto date and correct?

[hartvercoint]

Well the second step of a spork IS a hard-fork! So it's not going to solve all fundamental problems of hard forking.

[coins101]

Well the second step of a spork IS a hard-fork! So it's not going to solve all fundamental problems of hard forking.

Subtle, and very true.

But you don't implement the hard fork until you have seen if the code change on mainnet has worked.

EDIT

And, everyone one has updated!

[coins101]

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=579976.msg6335710#msg6335710

Whose got nerves of steel then?

[TheBlackDogeOfWallStreet]

I wasn't even aware stratum updates were required until about 20 minutes ago.  I am asking my developer to merge the changes now.

However, I still think this is stupid and should be done in the wallet code.

Great, thanks for looking into it!


I agree that this could have been communicated in a more transparent way. And I see that stuff like this is a huge pain for pools using custom stratum solutions (i.e. multipools).


@BlackDoge:

I think the magic happens here https://github.com/darkcoinproject/darkcoin-stratum/blob/master/lib/coinbasetx.py#L10 ll. 10-65

Alright cheers, I'm forwarding this to my engineers to see if we could make this work.

Personnaly at this time i think your a bad actor.
Im wrong ?
Refund all missing masternode fees, then we can said we are wrong about you.  

Cool story.

[eltito]

Well the second step of a spork IS a hard-fork! So it's not going to solve all fundamental problems of hard forking.

Well, yes, but the difference is that with a traditional hard fork, if you wanted to revert you had to get everyone to update their clients (again).  With a spork, the added functionality can simply be switched off remotely if it's causing problems.

[shojayxt]

I wasn't even aware stratum updates were required until about 20 minutes ago.  I am asking my developer to merge the changes now.

However, I still think this is stupid and should be done in the wallet code.

Great, thanks for looking into it!


I agree that this could have been communicated in a more transparent way. And I see that stuff like this is a huge pain for pools using custom stratum solutions (i.e. multipools).


@BlackDoge:

I think the magic happens here https://github.com/darkcoinproject/darkcoin-stratum/blob/master/lib/coinbasetx.py#L10 ll. 10-65

Alright cheers, I'm forwarding this to my engineers to see if we could make this work.

Personnaly at this time i think your a bad actor.
Im wrong ?
Refund all missing masternode fees, then we can said we are wrong about you.  

Wow.  The guy spelled out everything pretty straight forward and it's obvious that he is trying to "Comply" with the "Directives".  He has valid points regarding the update procedure and lack of consideration for pools like his that run customized software.  Then you come on here and accuse the guy of cheating people out of masternode payments intentionally.

You're a shining example of what the DRK community has turned into.

[jdp527]

https://darkcointalk.org/threads/enhanced-darkcoin-wallet-ui.1705/

I'm excited about this. Hope it's functional and fancy. #iggy

[coins101]

Well the second step of a spork IS a hard-fork! So it's not going to solve all fundamental problems of hard forking.

Well, yes, but the difference is that with a traditional hard fork, if you wanted to revert you had to get everyone to update their clients (again).  With a spork, the added functionality can simply be switched off remotely if it's causing problems.

So, come on spokesperson (notice the use of neutral language there so as not to offend any skirts out there  ), did Evan and the rest of the Dev team just:

1. Introduce a way to fork in the event of ASICs being produced, which leaves the decision to use ASICs down to the community and not the devs who would fear the risks of a hard fork more than the use of ASICs?
2. Did we, the Royal we, just create a way for Bitcoin, Litecoin and any of the shitcoins to hard fork with significantly reduced risks?

This is really important. Darkcoin needs to be given credit for showing a way to innovate the hell out of crypto with fewer risks.

[Brilliantrocket]

Wow.  The guy spelled out everything pretty straight forward and it's obvious that he is trying to "Comply" with the "Directives".  He has valid points regarding the update procedure and lack of consideration for pools like his that run customized software.  Then you come on here and accuse the guy of cheating people out of masternode payments intentionally.

You're a shining example of what the DRK community has turned into.

Don't you have anything better to do than troll this thread everyday? It's kind of sad, man.

[coins101]

https://darkcointalk.org/threads/enhanced-darkcoin-wallet-ui.1705/

I'm excited about this. Hope it's functional and fancy. #iggy

Can we get some more cross posts going, please?

This is really frustrating. So many good things going on, but behind closed doors. Yes I have an account on darkcointalk. But people new to DRK don't. Tell me, who are the ones that hold DRK and those that are potential DRK buyers?

[eltito]

We are adapting.  The point is via lazy coding you are increasing the number of headaches in my life and I have enough already.

+111111

Multipools support so many coins, and every coin has their way of doing things, and we already have such a huge headache from avoiding forks, mandatory updates (across 40 wallets!!) that when a coin comes along and is like "Hey now you also need custom code, or a stratum update" it throws quiet the fork in to our operations. We don't follow your coins directly (at least I don't) but we are more than happy to comply and make sure your eco system is working-- just make it easy and clear for us to do so, because we have to do it across MANY MANY coins every day.

Although I understand the issue: This is what you earn quite some money with. I think it's worth your while

Thanks for giving your best to comply!

All we are asking for is a centralized area with some information regarding this change-- like so some one can Twitter me a link and say "DO THIS" -- we will always do that-- but we've been hunting this information down for like 2 days, with no clear answers. Hell even the other multipool guy didn't know he had to update his stratum-- a lot of the pools don't -- I spoke with them yesterday.

People are just contacting us from your communities telling us to update the wallets and nothing else-- which we have done. We don't follow DarkCoin, we don't know the intricacies of your currency, or what magic joojoo it takes to run. Just send us some clear info, and we will comply, if we can't have that info then we delist because otherwise we're made out to be some fraudsters.

I'm not attacking your community, I have no beef with your coin, or how you guys and your developers chose to run it. But whether you like it or not, pools and multipools are a big part of your ecosystem, and help keep your blockchain secure and moving transactions. Please just give us 1 forum post or a link to a dev saying "for payments to work, you will need to do this, this and this in these methods and or functions and or configs, or you would need to write something that does this specific action." That's it, I don't think it's asking for much.

To the guy with the airline analogy, if some regulation changed with an airline, there would be some sort of instructions that followed, to help airports comply. I don't feel we have received that information, or that information is not in an easily accessible place.

Edit: it was a travel agency, not an airport.

This was an oversight on my part.  I'll work on getting the stratum update information distributed as soon as possible.

[coins101]

https://darkcointalk.org/threads/enhanced-darkcoin-wallet-ui.1705/

I'm excited about this. Hope it's functional and fancy. #iggy

Can we get some more cross posts going, please?

This is really frustrating. So many good things going on, but behind closed doors. Yes I have an account on darkcointalk. But people new to DRK don't. Tell me, who are the ones that hold DRK and those that are potential DRK buyers?

[Brilliantrocket]

Remember that's the first prototype. I don't think we want to bombard users with that much information. Also, we might want to look into getting a professional to do the design work.

[TheBlackDogeOfWallStreet]

We are adapting.  The point is via lazy coding you are increasing the number of headaches in my life and I have enough already.

+111111

Multipools support so many coins, and every coin has their way of doing things, and we already have such a huge headache from avoiding forks, mandatory updates (across 40 wallets!!) that when a coin comes along and is like "Hey now you also need custom code, or a stratum update" it throws quiet the fork in to our operations. We don't follow your coins directly (at least I don't) but we are more than happy to comply and make sure your eco system is working-- just make it easy and clear for us to do so, because we have to do it across MANY MANY coins every day.

Although I understand the issue: This is what you earn quite some money with. I think it's worth your while

Thanks for giving your best to comply!

All we are asking for is a centralized area with some information regarding this change-- like so some one can Twitter me a link and say "DO THIS" -- we will always do that-- but we've been hunting this information down for like 2 days, with no clear answers. Hell even the other multipool guy didn't know he had to update his stratum-- a lot of the pools don't -- I spoke with them yesterday.

People are just contacting us from your communities telling us to update the wallets and nothing else-- which we have done. We don't follow DarkCoin, we don't know the intricacies of your currency, or what magic joojoo it takes to run. Just send us some clear info, and we will comply, if we can't have that info then we delist because otherwise we're made out to be some fraudsters.

I'm not attacking your community, I have no beef with your coin, or how you guys and your developers chose to run it. But whether you like it or not, pools and multipools are a big part of your ecosystem, and help keep your blockchain secure and moving transactions. Please just give us 1 forum post or a link to a dev saying "for payments to work, you will need to do this, this and this in these methods and or functions and or configs, or you would need to write something that does this specific action." That's it, I don't think it's asking for much.

To the guy with the airline analogy, if some regulation changed with an airline, there would be some sort of instructions that followed, to help airports comply. I don't feel we have received that information, or that information is not in an easily accessible place.

Edit: it was a travel agency, not an airport.

This was an oversight on my part.  I'll work on getting the stratum update information distributed as soon as possible.

Thank you, I will PM me you my personal contact information if that helps at all.